Global Elite Meet In Secret... but don't pay attention!

"An extraordinary thing happened last weekend. The world's most secretive strategy group, Bilderberg, poked its nose out of the shadows and launched its own website: bilderbergmeetings.org. For an organisation that prefers to cordon the press a mile from its meetings, whose press relations policy to date has been to arrest, harass and search journalists, this was an astonishing turnaround.

Until now, David Rockefeller's policy forum carried on quietly out of sight. It welcomed politicians (David Cameron in 2008, George Osborne 2006-2009) to strategise in secret with corporate heads, European royalty and bank bosses. This year saw Google CEO Eric Schmidt take part alongside Robert Zoellick (president of the World Bank), Bill Gates and the usual sprinkle of EU commissioners and Goldman Sachs heavyweights. If you didn't know it was going on, that's understandable. It's what they wanted.

This year, in the Spanish seaside town of Sitges, the sheer weight of attention on Bilderberg became too much for its policy of "ignorance management". TV crews at the police line, bloggers blogging, the Spanish press asking questions about cost, the Canadian press wondering at this year's unusual glut of Canucks – finally, the mainstream press was taking notice. I found myself taking part in a debate on the BBC World Service. I knew something had changed when Kate Adie spoke passionately of her concerns about the armed secrecy of Bilderberg.

This secrecy in action is quite a sight. For four whole days, a normally tranquil hotel on the Spanish coast was transformed into the Pentagon: riot police, police helicopters, military divers moored offshore, and hundreds of plain clothes officers – a mammoth €10m campaign of press exclusion for a "private meeting", all paid for by the already hard-pressed Spanish taxpayer.

Spain was an odd choice of location for Bilderberg 2010. One of the organisers, who sits alongside Kenneth Clarke on the core steering committee (which should be considered the "real" Bilderberg), is Henry Kissinger – still wanted for questioning in Spain over war crimes. Seems the police were pointing their machine guns in the wrong direction.

Still, never mind the guns: this year all the furious secrecy and bonkers policing didn't stop the story breaking. The bizarre atmosphere of confusion, paranoia and misapprehension – a direct result of Bilderberg's half-century history of press suppression, of delegates crouching on limo floors, or lying to their parliaments that they've attended (I'm talking to you, Tony Blair) – is finally lifting.

On the Bilderberg website, they've just changed one of their tabs from "meeting" to "press release". It's hilarious. Less hilarious is the damage-control strategy that is kicking into place. No longer able to deny its existence, Bilderberg has shifted gear: the story they're putting out now is that "nothing goes on", "just some old chaps having a chinwag" – old, insignificant chaps like José Zapatero (the Spanish PM), Peter Voser (CEO of Royal Dutch Shell), Paul Volcker (chairman of Obama's economic advisory board), Richard Holbrooke (Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan), Josef Ackermann (CEO of Deutsche Bank). Have a look online at our Bilderberg 2010 "Power Gallery" for more "golfing buddies".

Have a look at the piece by Bush speechwriter and Bilderberg attendee Robert Frum, on the website of the National Post – a Canadian newspaper, set up by Conrad Black (pre-incarceration Bilderberg attendee). Just read it, and see what you think. This all looks like Bilderberg trying to "manage the story". It's a bit clunky, because they're not very good at it; they've not had much practice yet. I'm sure we'll see more examples of this "hang-out for has-beens" story in the media. But I'm also hopeful that this disinformation will melt away under scrutiny, just as the world's ignorance of Bilderberg's very existence has finally withered and died."

The Bilderberg Group, founded in 1954 by European elites, including Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands (a former SS officer and Nazi party member), is an international think tank that brings together elites from Western Europe and North America once a year to discuss world events and attempt to form a consensus on major issues. They are virtually devoid of any media attention or coverage until recent years, with this year being the most international exposure the group has ever gotten.

For years, anyone who mentioned the name "Bilderberg" was instantly branded a "conspiracy theorist." In fact, I made a forum on realjock last year about last year's conference and was branded a "conspiracy theorist" for simply talking about the group. Funny logic.

So, putting aside absurd ideas that we should NOT examine an influential international think tank that meets in secret, where participants are not allowed to discuss the meeting (which takes place over four days at a four star hotel in a different location every year), and which the media is not invited to. Media personalities and CEOs of major media corporations, such as the CEO of the Washington Post Company are always present, but their publications do not cover the event.

Participants claim that Bilderberg is simply a forum where people can meet to discuss issues in 'private' (not 'secret') where they don't need to fear being quoted, and thus, they can speak more freely. To a degree, this is true. But Bilderberg does seek to establish a consensus view among Atlantic elites, and so its activities should be brought to light. This year, the Bilderberg Group created a genuine website for the first time ever, as previously they attempted to deny their existence.

Now, if what Bilderberg does is for the good of mankind, as they claim, why is everything done in secret?

David Frum, a Canadian neoconservative who attended several meetings in the 1990s, and was Bush's speechwriter who coined the term "Axis of Evil" (yes, a Canadian coined that term), wrote for the National Post in Canada, that the Bilderberg Group has "a distinct yesteryear quality. You were much more likely to meet an “ex” this or “former” that than anyone in office today. Guests too tended to reflect the interests and enthusiasms of prior decades." In other words, claims Frum, it's a bunch of old, increasingly-irrelevant "yesteryear" individuals who hold no power today.http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/06/08/david-frum-on-bilderberg-international-group-of-mystery/

However, go to the Bilderberg Group's website and see a list of this years participants, hardly a group of yesteryear elders verging on political atrophy.

Some of this year's participants (according the the group's website):

Honorary Chairman: Eitenne Davignon - Vice Chairman of Suez-Tractebel, former head of the International Energy Agency, former member of the European Commission (the decision-making group of the EU), former Chairman of Belgian bank, Société Générale de Belgique, former member of the European Round Table of Industrialists, and is on the board of multiple European companies. In 2009, he told a European newspaper that the euro was debated at Bilderberg.http://euobserver.com/9/27778

Josef Ackerman, Chairman and CEO of Deutsche Bank, Deputy Chairman of Siemens AG, non-Executive Director of Shell, Visiting professor of Finance at the London School of Economics, and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Institute of International Finance.

Carl Bildt, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, former Prime Minister of Sweden, formerly the EU's Special Envoy to the former Yugoslavia, and was UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy to the Balkans, and was a member of the board of RAND Corporation (a Pentagon-linked American policy think tank), as well as a board member of the International Institute for International Economics in London and the International Advisory Board of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York (which is the most influential think tank in the US).

Gordon Campbell, premier of British Columbia and corrupt politician (he is our HATED premier in this province).

W. Edmund Clark, CEO of TD Bank Financial Group

George A. David, CEO of Coca-Cola

John Elkann, CEO of Fiat

Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft and Co-Chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates FOundation

Phillip Gordon - USA Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs

Donald E. Graham - Chairman and CEO of the Washington post Company

Richard Holbrooke - US Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, long-time Bilderberg member, former US Ambassador to Germany, former Ambassador to the United Nations, former US Envoy to the Balkans, former Senior Advisor to Lehman Bros., former Vice CHairman of Perseus LLC, former member of the board of directors of the now-bankrupt American International Group (AIG), member of the board of directors of the Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the Citizens Committee for New York City, and the Economic Club of New York, member of the National Endowment for Democracy (the NED, which funds "peaceful revolutions" in central asian and East European nations that support US strategic and economic objectives in the region).

Jan Hommem - CEO of ING Group

Robert Hormats - USA Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs

James A Johnson - Vice Chairman of Perseus LLC, former Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae, former Managing Director of Lehman Bros., and current board member of Goldman Sachs, Gannett Company, Target, and UnitedHealth Group, Chairman of the Brookings Institution (a major policy think tank in the US), and is also a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Friends of Bilderberg, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commission (which was founded in 1973 by Bilderberg members David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski. At the time, Rockefeller was Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations and CEO and Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank).

John Kerr - UK Member of the House of Lords, Deputy Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell, director of Rio Tinto plc, and is an Executive Committee member of the Trilateral Commission.

Henry Kissinger - long-time Bilderberg member, Chairman of Kissinger Associates (a private consulting firm), former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser for Nixon and Ford, long-time member of the Council on Foreign Relations, founding member of the Trilateral Commission, wanted war criminal, member of the International Advisory Board of JP Morgan Chase, long-time Rockefeller aide (first to Nelson, then his brother David Rockefeller), helped orchestrate the 1973 coup in Chile, and sits on a number of corporate boards.

Jessica T Matthews - President of the Carnegie Endowment for International peace, a major US think tank, formerly worked in the US National Security Council, was a member of the Editorial Board of the Washington post, founding Vice President and Director of the World Resources Institute, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and is a Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Century Foundation and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, and previously served on the boards of the Brookings Institution and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

Frank McKenna - Deputy Chair, TD Bank Financial Group, former Canadian Ambassador to the US, former Premier of New Brunswick, was a member of the Advisory Board of the Carlyle Group (which represented names such as George Bush Sr. and the bin Laden family), and was also a board member of the largest Canadian media conglomerate, CanWest Global Communications Corporation, which controls the majority of Canadian newspapers.

Thierry de Montrbrial - Founder and President of the French Institute for International Relations, the top think tank in France.

Mario Monti - former Italian member of the European Commission and is a politician and economist.

Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands - also is the primary shareholder in Royal Dutch Shell, as well as being a shareholder in a number of Dutch banks

Jorma Ollila - Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell, Chairman of Nokia, member of the board of directors of Ford Motor Company, Chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists.

Frank Pearl - Chairman and CEO of Perseus LLC, member of the Board of Trustees of Rockefeller University and the Brookings Institution, a member of the Board of Directors of the Institute for International Economics, member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and the American Friends of Bilderberg.

Richard Perle - member of the American Enterprise Institute (the top neoconservative think tank in the US), and was a member of George W Bush's Defense Policy Board in the Pentagon, was one of the arch-neo-cons who pushed for war with Iraq alongside Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz (who were both Bilderberg attendees in the past).

Robert Rubin - Co-Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, former Secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton (where he dismantled the Glass-Steagle Act leading directly to the financial crisis), former board member and chairman of Goldman Sachs (before becoming US Treasury Secretary), and after serving as Secretary became a Senior Adviser to Citigroup, he has also served as a board member of the New York Stock Exchange, the Ford Motor Company, Citigroup, Harvard Corporation, Center for National Policy, and was a member of the Board of Trustees of the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Javier Solana - former Secretary General of the Council of the European Union, former Secretary General of NATO, member of the Trilateral Commission, and is a member of the Club of Rome.

James B. Steinberg - Deputy Secretary of State under Hilary Clinton (who has attended past meetings).

Queen Sofia of Spain

Bjorn Stigson - President, World Business Council for Sustainable Development

Lawrence Summers - USA Director of the National Economic Council (one of Obama's top economic advisers), former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under Robert Rubin in the Clinton administration, where alongside with Rubin and Alan Greenspan at the Fed (who is also a long-time Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg group member), they dismantled banking regulations which led directly to the financial crisis, he was also a former Chief Economist of the World Bank (where he became infamous for writing a secret memo which stated that the West SHOULD dump toxic waste in Africa, because by the time the bad side effects of cancer hit the people there, they would already be statistically dead, due to the high mortality rate, so he said, "the economic rationale of toxic waste dumping in Africa cannot be denied"), former President of Harvard University.

Peter D. Sutherland - Chairman of Goldman Sachs International, Chairman of British Petroleum, former Chairman of Royal Bank of Scotland, former Attorney General of Ireland, former member of the European Commission, Director General of GATT, and was the first Director-General of the World Trade Organization (WTO), on the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group, Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, Vice Chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists.

Paul Volcker - Chairman of Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, Chairman of the Group of Thirty, former Chairman of the Federal reserve System (where he orchestrated the 1980s debt crisis), member of the Trilateral Commission, and former aid to David Rockefeller at Chase Manhattan Bank and former executive at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Peter Voser - Chairman and CEO of Royal Dutch Shell

James Wolfensohn - former President of the World Bank, former member of the Rockefeller Foundation.

"The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations. Approximately 130 participants will attend of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America. About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds are from finance, industry, labor, education, and communications. The meeting is private in order to encourage frank and open discussion."

Considering that the key policy-makers and top industrial, financial, academic and media representatives are present at each meeting, does it not seem appropriate to expose these meetings, to seek transparency at these meetings, and to analyze these meetings and this group both historically and presently?

Why must 'questioning' be considered 'conspiracy theory'?

Good deeds are done openly and for the public to see and more importantly, good deeds are those done BY the people, against the power structures of our societies, globally and locally. Think of the truly progressive and needed changes that came to societies, such as the Civil RIghts Movement in the United States. Was it the power structures at the time and involved that led and fought for civil rights, or was it the people?

Plato felt that the ideal society was an aristocracy led by a benevolent intellectual elite; however, he concluded, these people would almost invariably and inevitably become corrupt and self-interested, so it was not plausible. Thus, he opted for an imperfect republic.

Today, we don't even have a benevolent aristocracy, or any aristocracy for that matter, we have pure and simple plutocracy (rule by the rich). These meetings are all members of the plutocracy, nationally and internationally (as with 'globalization', power has globalized, and the upper class has transnationalized into a transnational capitalist class.

Take most of these meeting participants on their own, and you find someone in a position of power and influence, who has often in the past abused that power and influence, and whose name is synonymous with corruption and greed.

Bilderberg has been represented continually by people from the following institutions:

I am very impressed MEOHMY and thanks for shedding the light of day on this group. Unfortunately they are not the only group that has met in secret that has influential CEO's and leaders.

You said: Considering that the key policy-makers and top industrial, financial, academic and media representatives are present at each meeting, does it not seem appropriate to expose these meetings, to seek transparency at these meetings, and to analyze these meetings and this group both historically and presently?

now your scaring me Meohmy....as after i saw that movie 2012 and saw how the world leaders kept everyone in the dark about impending doom... ive always thought things like secret meetings could have or took place in reality. All of which were organized by world influences.

At the 2009 meeting, Bilderberg took place in Greece. The following is a list of prominent Americans who took part in the meeting, MANY of whom were members of the newly formed Obama administration:

Keith Alexander - Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), the premier US spy agency which monitors and wiretaps all phone calls and emails and electronic information on every citizen in the US.

Richard Holbrooke - US Special Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan (which means he manages US foreign policy for Afghanistan and Pakistan for the State Department, giving him his own special staff and division within Hilary Clinton's State Department).

James Steinberg - Deputy Secretary of State (2nd in command in the State Department under Hilary Clinton)

Paul Volcker - Chairman of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board, making him one of Obama's top economic advisers.

From Greece, present at the Bilderberg meeting were:

- 2 Members of Parliament- the Chairman and CEO of the National Bank of Greece- the Minister of Economy and Finance- Minister of Foreign Affairs

Within the year, Greece's economy implodes, and the major institutions and individuals involved with the 'bailout' of Greece, were represented at the same Bilderberg meeting. Greece's debt is held primarily by German and French banks, such as Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas, Societe Generale, Munich Re, Allianz and Commerzbank. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE64A2IW20100511

Greece has been forced to implement "austerity measures" (meaning to cut all social spending - medical, education, welfare, public sector jobs, and drastically increase taxes... in order to start "restructuring" its debt, and in order to get a loan (bailout) from the EU, the European Central Bank and the IMF, which bailed out Greece by giving them a loan to pay their annual interest payments on their debt. The following people and institutions were present at the 2009 Bilderberg meeting:

Josef Ackermann - Chairman and CEO of Deutsche Bank

Neelie Kroes - Commissioner of the European Commission (the decision-making body of the EU)

Christine Lagarde - French Minister of Economy, Industry, and Employment

Philippe Maystadt - President of the European Investment Bank (the European Union's long-term lending institution)

So just a 'few' people who were involved or had significant interests in the Greek bailout, which forces the Greek people to suffer the bad debts of their corrupt leaders, owed to French and German multinational banks. Thus, to pay the bad debt to the big banks, the Greek people must lose their standard of living.

The debt crisis will spread across Europe and the world, taking next into its fold Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and all the way to the UK, Japan and the USA. As the debt crisis spreads, banks and investors bet AGAINST the ability of national governments to address their debt, thus making the debt more expensive (the self-destructive nature of speculation). All the industrialized countries will be forced into implementing a "post-industrial revolution" in which the middle classes are wiped clean under the auspices of "austerity measures", which will radically increase poverty and social inequalities... all in order to pay illegitimate debts to global banks.

Very interesting and good analysis of this "group" MeOhMe. Could you enlighten us a bit more on what of their policies has been put into practice "as a group" (not that what could have been done as an individuals with power), and perhaps a sort of a "forecast" on what they could be discussing and the decisions they could be making for the future considering the actual world financial crisis?. What are your thoughts about that?.

I feel like it would be a good idea to put a face to the names of some of Bilderberg's top people historically and presently. And it's amazing how some of these people just LOOK the part.

Meet your global oligarchy.

David Rockefeller: Founding member of Bilderberg, member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg group, Former Chairman and CEO of Chase Manhattan, former President of the International Advisory Board of JP Morgan Chase, former Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (1970-1985), Honourary Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (1985 - present), Founder and Honourary Chairman of the Americas Society and the Council of the Americas (a dual-organization that promotes free trade and economic integration throughout the Americas, was instrumental in the implementation of NAFTA), Founder and still Honourary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission.

In his 2002 book, Memoirs, David Rockefeller wrote (page 405):

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Peter D. Sutherland: Chairman of BP and Chairman of Goldman Sachs International, former Chairman of Royal Bank of Scotland, former Director General of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Chairman of the Trilateral Commission and member of the European Round Table of Industrialists.

Henry Kissinger: former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser, former Board Member of the Council on Foreign Relations, member of the Trilateral Commission, Chairman of Kissinger Associates, wanted war criminal.

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, former board member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Trustee of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a major US think tank, former adviser to BP, and was a foreign policy adviser on Obama's campaign to become President.

James Wolfensohn: former President of the World Bank, Chairman of the International Advisory Board of Citigroup, President of Wolfensohn & Company, Honourary Trustee of the Brookings Institution, and former Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation and member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Bilderbergers in Obama's administration.

Richard Holbrooke: Current US Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

MeOhMy saidParticipants claim that Bilderberg is simply a forum where people can meet to discuss issues in 'private' (not 'secret') where they don't need to fear being quoted, and thus, they can speak more freely.

I think they have a valid point.

Yes, it would be nice if everything were transparent. But that's incompatible with politics. Did you see the little experiment Obama did, in which after a year of bickering and closed-door meetings, he invited the Republican leaders to sit down with him and Democrats and have a full-on discussion about health care, all day, live on camera for the world to see? The result was not pretty. The discussion was not substantive. It was grandstanding. Participants hewed to their ideological positions, because they knew they were being watched and their image is all-important.

Whether you're American or Canadian, you know that even within your own "democratic" government, the real negotiating happens in the secret meetings. Without them, nothing would get done. Until this changes within our own governments, I think it's kinda ridiculous to demand transparency of an international group that's not even bound to our Constitution.

Perhaps a sort of a "forecast" on what they could be discussing and the decisions they could be making for the future considering the actual world financial crisis.

THESE are the types of questions we should be asking. I refrained from addressing these right away because when I do, I tend to be called a "conspiracy theorist", so I decided to present simple "facts". However, this group is something I have spent a few years studying, researching and writing about.

One of the original aims of the Bilderberg Group was to organize the formation of the European Union and the single currency, the euro.

Joseph Retinger, the founder of the Bilderberg Group, was also one of the principle intellectual founders of the European Movement (EM), a lobbying organization dedicated to creating a Federal Europe (a United States of Europe). The European Coal and Steel Community was founded in 1951, and in 1954 the Bilderberg Group was formed. Leaked documents from the 1955 Bilderberg meeting in Germany show that a main topic of discussion was "European unity" and that:

"The discussion affirmed complete support for the idea of integration and unification from the representatives of all the six nations of the Coal and Steel Community present at the conference.” Further, “A European speaker expressed concern about the need to achieve a common currency, and indicated that in his view this necessarily implied the creation of a central political authority.” Interestingly, “A United States participant confirmed that the United States had not weakened in its enthusiastic support for the idea of integration, although there was considerable diffidence in America as to how this enthusiasm should be manifested. Another United States participant urged his European friends to go ahead with the unification of Europe with less emphasis upon ideological considerations and, above all, to be practical and work fast.”http://file.wikileaks.org/file/bilderberg-meetings-report-1955.pdf

Thus, the idea of a common currency for Europe did not emerge in the 1990s, but in 1955 at the Bilderberg meeting.

In 1957, two years later, the Treaty of Rome was signed, which created the European Economic Community (EEC), also known as the European Community. Over the decades, various other treaties were signed, and more countries joined the European Community.

In 1992, the Maastricht Treaty was signed, which created the European Union and led to the creation of the Euro. The European Monetary Institute was created in 1994, the European Central Bank was founded in 1998, and the Euro was launched in 1999. Etienne Davignon, Chairman of the Bilderberg Group and former EU Commissioner, revealed in March of 2009 that the Euro was debated and planned at Bilderberg conferences.http://euobserver.com/9/27778

In 2004, the European Constitution was to be signed by all 25-member states of the EU, which was a treaty to establish a constitution for the entire European Union.

The Constitution was a move towards creating a European superstate, creating an EU foreign minister, and with it, coordinated foreign policy, with the EU taking over the seat of Britain on the UN Security Council, representing all EU member states, forcing the nations to “actively and unreservedly” follow an EU foreign policy; set out the framework to create an EU defence policy, as an appendage to or separate from NATO; the creation of a European Justice system, with the EU defining “minimum standards in defining offences and setting sentences,” and creates common asylum and immigration policy; and it would also hand over to the EU the power to “ensure co-ordination of economic and employment policies”; and EU law would supercede all law of the member states, thus making the member nations relative to mere provinces within a centralized federal government system.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-307249/EU-Constitution--main-points.html

The Constitution was largely written up by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, former President of the French Republic from 1974 to 1981. Giscard d’Estaing also happens to be a member of the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and is also a close friend of Henry Kissinger, having co-authored papers with him. In 2005, French and Dutch voters answered the referendums in their countries, in which they rejected the EU Constitution, which required total unanimity in order to pass.

In 2007, a move was undertaken to introduce what was called the Lisbon Treaty, to be approved by all member-states. Giscard d’Estaing wrote an article for the Independent in which he stated that, “The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content.” He described the process of creating the Lisbon Treaty: “It was the legal experts for the European Council who were charged with drafting the new text. They have not made any new suggestions. They have taken the original draft constitution, blown it apart into separate elements, and have then attached them, one by one, to existing treaties. The Treaty of Lisbon is thus a catalogue of amendments. It is unpenetrable for the public.” The main difference was that the word “constitution” was removed and banished from the text.http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/valeacutery-giscard-destaing-the-eu-treaty-is-the-same-as-the-constitution-398286.html

The Telegraph reported that though the Treaty dropped the word “constitution,” it remained the same in “giving the EU the trappings of a global power and cutting national sovereignty.” It contained plans to create an EU President, who “will serve a two and half year term but unlike democratic heads of state he or she will be chosen by Europe's leaders not by voters” and “will take over key international negotiations from national heads of government.” The Constitution’s “Foreign Minister” becomes the “High Representative,” who “will run a powerful EU diplomatic service and will be more important on the global and European stage than national foreign ministers.” It sets out to create an “Interior Ministry” which will “centralise databases holding fingerprints and DNA,” and “make EU legislation on new police and surveillance powers.” The ability for EU nations to use vetoes will end, and the Treaty “includes a clause hardwiring an EU "legal personality" and ascendancy over national courts.”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/2123045/EU-Treaty-Lisbon-Treaty-resurrected-defeated-EU-Constitution.html

There are some independent and alternative news journalists who have been following the Bilderberg group around the world for years, finding out only at the last minute where the meeting will take place and going to cover it and photograph participants. Only since 2006 has exposure to the meetings really began to enter the mainstream. These few alternative news journalists claim to have sources within Bilderberg, and while it cannot be independently verified, a lot of their information has turned out to be accurate.

These reporters would report that Bilderberg was dicussing a major increase in the prices of oil in 2006, and in 2007 they decided that Paul Wolfowtiz would be replaced at the World Bank with Robert Zoellick, who George Bush appointed to head the World Bank a few months later.

At the 1973 meeting of the Bilderberg group, as documents show, the discussion entailed the prospect of a 400% increase in the price of oil, and what to do about the flood of petro-dollars that would enter the world market. Among the 1973 participants were the CEOs of Royal Dutch Shell, British Petroleum (BP), Total S.A., ENI, Exxon, as well as significant banking interests and individuals such as Baron Edmond de Rothschild and David Rockefeller, and the US Secretary of State at the time, Henry Kissinger.

At the meeting, which took place in Sweden that year, an OPEC Middle East oil revenue rise of over 400% was predicted. A Bilderberg document from the meeting stated that, “The task of improving relations between energy importing countries should begin with consultations between Europe, the US and Japan. These three regions, which represented about 60 per cent of world energy consumption, accounted for an even greater proportion of world trade in energy products, as they absorbed 80 per cent of world energy exports.” The same document also stated that “an energy crisis or an increase in energy costs could irremediably jeopardize the economic expansion of developing countries which had no resources of their own,” and the “misuse or inadequate control of the financial resources of the oil producing countries could completely disorganize and undermine the world monetary system.”http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/bilderbergfile/contents.htm

The oil price rises themselves were the result of pressure from the Americans, namely Henry Kissinger. Sheikh Yamani, the Saudi Arabian OPEC oil minister at the time of the Yom Kippur War and subsequent OPEC oil price increases, told the Observer in 2001 that, "I am 100 per cent sure that the Americans were behind the increase in the price of oil. The oil companies were in in real trouble at that time, they had borrowed a lot of money and they needed a high oil price to save them." Further:

"He says he was convinced of this by the attitude of the Shah of Iran, who in one crucial day in 1974 moved from the Saudi view, that a hike would be dangerous to Opec because it would alienate the US, to advocating higher prices.

'King Faisal sent me to the Shah of Iran, who said: "Why are you against the increase in the price of oil? That is what they want? Ask Henry Kissinger - he is the one who wants a higher price".'

Subsequently, with high oil prices, OPEC nations had a major surplus of what was termed "petro-dollars", which then needed to be invested. Thus, Western European and primarily American banks came to the scene, recycling the oil wealth of the OPEC nations to the developing world, such as Africa, which then needed to heavily borrow (due to finance industrialization), as oil is the life-blood of an industrial society. However, when Bilderberg and Trilateral Commission member Paul Volcker became Chairman of the Federal Reserve in 1979, he raised interest rates dramatically, from 2% in the late 70s to 18% in the early 80s. Thus, countries who borrowed heavily couldnt afford to pay their interest payments, Mexico defaulted on its loans in 1982, and thus set off the 1980s debt crisis which spread across Latin America, Africa and parts of Asia. Then came the IMF and World Bank (always represented and run by Bilderbergers), offering "structural adjustment packages" (SAPs) to developing nations, demanding major reforms in return for loans. The SAPs were ultimately tools of imperialism, handing total economic and even significant political control over a nation to the IMF and World Bank, which dictated taxes and all government finances.

MeOhMy saidParticipants claim that Bilderberg is simply a forum where people can meet to discuss issues in 'private' (not 'secret') where they don't need to fear being quoted, and thus, they can speak more freely.

I think they have a valid point.

Whether you're American or Canadian, you know that even within your own "democratic" government, the real negotiating happens in the secret meetings. Without them, nothing would get done. Until this changes within our own governments, I think it's kinda ridiculous to demand transparency of an international group that's not even bound to our Constitution.

But isn't the point that a secretive international group shouldnt be making ANY decisions for the world? Who elected them?

This... is not democracy.

And yes, our own governments should be more democratic and open, so why do we keep giving more authority to international organizations which are even more secretive and less accountable than our corrupt national political structures?

Does this make sense?

Keep in mind, things like Congress are largely irrelevant. Sure, they are an irritant to domestic political issues, but it's all largely just a sideshow: health care, gay marriage, abortion, etc., all these issues are very ideological, religious, and ultimately divisive. Thus, politicians bicker and people argue, but meanwhile, groups like the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations determine foreign and economic policy for the US, and the West as a whole. That seems far more significant. They act as engines of empire: being socializing forces for national and transnational elites. It's not about a "conspiracy", which is, in fact, a legal term, but it is about "socializing" a class, creating consensus views within the upper class to make it more cohesive and coordinated.

These organizations have shaped and seek to re-shape the global political economy, this is beyond a simple nation, this is about our world and the power structures within it. Secrecy in these corridors is far from acceptable.

Ultimately, the Bilderberg Group holds onto a particular ideology of how the world should work: they are globalists. They have an ideological belief that nation-states are archaic concepts which need to be replaced with a system of "global governance", including regional governmental structures, such as the EU, and institutions of global governance (such as the WTO, World Bank, IMF, UN, etc), and ultimately, that a more cohesive global governance structure should be constructed. It's not about 'conspiracy', it's about ideology.

Denis Healy, a former Bilderberg Steering Committee member and founding member of the Bilderberg Group, told a journalist that:

"To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing."

"Bilderberg is a way of bringing together politicians, industrialists, financiers and journalists. Politics should involve people who aren't politicians. We make a point of getting along younger politicians who are obviously rising, to bring them together with financiers and industrialists who offer them wise words. It increases the chance of having a sensible global policy."http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2001/mar/10/extract1

Bilderberg is not a cabal of conspiracists, but is a forum that brings together and institutionalizes an ideology which seeks to dismantle national sovereignty and nation-states in favour of regional and global governance structures, simultaneously.

. . . how sad . . . you could have a decent mind, if you would let yourself . .

"Good deeds are done openly and for the public to see and more importantly, good deeds are those done BY the people, against the power structures of our societies, globally and locally. . ."

1. Good deeds, when they are done properly, i.e., in a humble spirit, are done quietly, even anonymously, not for show. I have known some very powerful people and they do actually give of themselves sometimes and do good deeds. (They are still horrible in their own way, but they are not the caricatures you present.) Would you believe that Michael Milken's chief bond trader would help me carry a box of gifts into a unwed mother's shelter? Well, it happened, because I was there and I saw it.

2. The Bilderbergers have been common knowledge for ages . . . none of your posts are news at all to anyone who reads . . . you just like feeling as if you are oracular . . . so did I at 22. But it's a tired act.

3. If people (the rank and file, the hoi polloi, the [m]asses) are so very easily deceived, why would they or do they deserve any kind of freedom? In other words, why are you so exercised about what appears to be the order dictated by nature? Your poltical philosophy needs a lot of work. You aren't a democrat or a populist. You are a budding misanthrope, and I applaud you for your honesty, however oblique it may be.

Some folks just love spending their precious days watching soap operas or attending monster truck rallies. Such people have abdicated so many of their responsibilties and do in fact deserve to have others do their thinking for them. You are their thinker. Pat yourself on the back.

But seriously, do yourself a favor -- go do some manual labor for a year or two.

MeOhMy saidParticipants claim that Bilderberg is simply a forum where people can meet to discuss issues in 'private' (not 'secret') where they don't need to fear being quoted, and thus, they can speak more freely.

I think they have a valid point.

Whether you're American or Canadian, you know that even within your own "democratic" government, the real negotiating happens in the secret meetings. Without them, nothing would get done. Until this changes within our own governments, I think it's kinda ridiculous to demand transparency of an international group that's not even bound to our Constitution.

But isn't the point that a secretive international group shouldnt be making ANY decisions for the world? Who elected them?

This... is not democracy.

And yes, our own governments should be more democratic and open, so why do we keep giving more authority to international organizations which are even more secretive and less accountable than our corrupt national political structures?

Does this make sense?

Keep in mind, things like Congress are largely irrelevant. Sure, they are an irritant to domestic political issues, but it's all largely just a sideshow: health care, gay marriage, abortion, etc., all these issues are very ideological, religious, and ultimately divisive. Thus, politicians bicker and people argue, but meanwhile, groups like the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations determine foreign and economic policy for the US, and the West as a whole. That seems far more significant. They act as engines of empire: being socializing forces for national and transnational elites. It's not about a "conspiracy", which is, in fact, a legal term, but it is about "socializing" a class, creating consensus views within the upper class to make it more cohesive and coordinated.

These organizations have shaped and seek to re-shape the global political economy, this is beyond a simple nation, this is about our world and the power structures within it. Secrecy in these corridors is far from acceptable.

That's the thing no one elected them. Correct me if I'm wrong but Bilderberg isn't an official international group nor are they formally chartered (unlike say the United Nations).

Whilst their meetings are done in secrecy and can't help but invite speculations and skepticisms, keep in mind, these are 130 influential figures who'd risk being misquoted or misrepresented or quoted correctly but whose views might not be received positively. In politics and corporate meetings, there are a lot of meetings/conversations in private that people attendees try to keep private--it's not a unique attribute of Bilderberg meetings. The fact that they have 130 minds in one room, which will most likely have countering views and that the composition of this 130 changes year to year makes me less suspicious.

noren said . . . how sad . . . you could have a decent mind, if you would let yourself . .

"Good deeds are done openly and for the public to see and more importantly, good deeds are those done BY the people, against the power structures of our societies, globally and locally. . ."

1. Good deeds, when they are done properly, i.e., in a humble spirit, are done quietly, even anonymously, not for show. I have known some very powerful people and they do actually give of themselves sometimes and do good deeds. (They are still horrible in their own way, but they are not the caricatures you present.) Would you believe that Michael Milken's chief bond trader would help me carry a box of gifts into a unwed mother's shelter? Well, it happened, because I was there and I saw it.

2. The Bilderbergers have been common knowledge for ages . . . none of your posts are news at all to anyone who reads . . . you just like feeling as if you are oracular . . . so did I at 22. But it's a tired act.

3. If people (the rank and file, the hoi polloi, the [m]asses) are so very easily deceived, why would they or do they deserve any kind of freedom? In other words, why are you so exercised about what appears to be the order dictated by nature? Your poltical philosophy needs a lot of work. You aren't a democrat or a populist. You are a budding misanthrope, and I applaud you for your honesty, however oblique it may be.

Some folks just love spending their precious days watching soap operas or attending monster truck rallies. Such people have abdicated so many of their responsibilties and do in fact deserve to have others do their thinking for them. You are their thinker. Pat yourself on the back.

But seriously, do yourself a favor -- go do some manual labor for a year or two.

Your friend, Noren

How shocking, another condescending post from Noren.

1) Your point is a non-sequitor. I was referring to "good deeds" in the form of mass, social, political, or economic changes, not carrying a bag of groceries or helping an old woman across the street. We are not talking about members of the Bilderberg group meeting together to discuss "helping you with a box of gifts for an unwed mother's shelter", the Bilderbergers claim that their meetings are secret and private for the 'good' of the discussion, and thus insinuating that they are doing 'good' work at the international level, not the local grocery store level. Thus, your point is stillborn.

2) You're dead wrong. They have NOT been common knowledge for decades. Many have known about them, but most still don't, and as you can see from this forum, many are just still finding out about it. Thus, again, you're wrong. And I am hardly oracular, as you claim I "like to feel", but am merely an 'observer'. There is nothing oracular about looking at history, politics, and economics. I have no crystal ball, nor claim to have one. Sorry for the "tired act", but your pseudo-superior holier-than-thou attitude is the only thing that is really "tired". Not to mention, it's a horribly antagonistic personality trait.

3) I agree that the masses are misinformed and propagandized and manipulated, but I also believe in humanity, for all the good it has done and is capable of doing. Throughout history, those who have done the worst of all humans have been those in power, while the greatest achievements have been from free-thinking individuals and massive direct political action. I believe in breaking down the walls of manipulation and propaganda, because with true freedom, human kind of capable of so much. My philosophy may need work, but I am constantly working on it, it is ever-changing and growing as I change and grow. Hardly something to be ashamed of. Your philosophy, on the other hand, seems to be rather elitist and frankly, sad. I'm glad I don't live in your world, even if that means I have to live in mine. Must be lonely up there on that cross, eh?

MeOhMy saidParticipants claim that Bilderberg is simply a forum where people can meet to discuss issues in 'private' (not 'secret') where they don't need to fear being quoted, and thus, they can speak more freely.

I think they have a valid point.

Whether you're American or Canadian, you know that even within your own "democratic" government, the real negotiating happens in the secret meetings. Without them, nothing would get done. Until this changes within our own governments, I think it's kinda ridiculous to demand transparency of an international group that's not even bound to our Constitution.

But isn't the point that a secretive international group shouldnt be making ANY decisions for the world? Who elected them?

This... is not democracy.

And yes, our own governments should be more democratic and open, so why do we keep giving more authority to international organizations which are even more secretive and less accountable than our corrupt national political structures?

Does this make sense?

Keep in mind, things like Congress are largely irrelevant. Sure, they are an irritant to domestic political issues, but it's all largely just a sideshow: health care, gay marriage, abortion, etc., all these issues are very ideological, religious, and ultimately divisive. Thus, politicians bicker and people argue, but meanwhile, groups like the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations determine foreign and economic policy for the US, and the West as a whole. That seems far more significant. They act as engines of empire: being socializing forces for national and transnational elites. It's not about a "conspiracy", which is, in fact, a legal term, but it is about "socializing" a class, creating consensus views within the upper class to make it more cohesive and coordinated.

These organizations have shaped and seek to re-shape the global political economy, this is beyond a simple nation, this is about our world and the power structures within it. Secrecy in these corridors is far from acceptable.

That's the thing no one elected them. Correct me if I'm wrong but Bilderberg isn't an official international group nor are they formally chartered (unlike say the United Nations).

Whilst their meetings are done in secrecy and can't help but invite speculations and skepticisms, keep in mind, these are 130 influential figures who'd risk being misquoted or misrepresented or quoted correctly but whose views might not be received positively. In politics and corporate meetings, there are a lot of meetings/conversations in private that people attendees try to keep private--it's not a unique attribute of Bilderberg meetings. The fact that they have 130 minds in one room, which will most likely have countering views and that the composition of this 130 changes year to year makes me less suspicious.

Look at the Steering Committee, it is largely a continual group of the same individuals from year to year. And you are correct, it is not unique of Bilderberg meetings, but what is unique is the scope and importance and attendees at the meetings. But this is like taking the creme de la creme of the World Economic Forum and putting them in a secret four day conference where they collude with one another. In fact, that's pretty much what Bilderberg is. They ARE divided, thank god. Reports coming out from the meetings throughout the Bush years showed how the European members were against a war on Iran, and had pushed the neoconservatives in the Bush administration back on that issue. This is good, you want a divided elite. But they are, never the less, the elite, and they serve THEIR interests, not ours.

Yes, corporate boardrooms have private meetings we are not given access to. But, we also dont elect board members to Royal Dutch Shell or JP Morgan Chase to run our governments and societies. Why do the board members of Shell and JP Morgan Chase get to have personal access to our elected leaders at secret meetings, when they are supposed to represent 'us'? Sorry, but, if that doesnt seem 'suspicious' or deleterious to democratic ideals, that seems somewhat ignorant.

Adam Smith, who wrote Wealth of Nations in 1776 and was the founding thinker of liberal economics and the "free market system", even wrote in his book:

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary."

In fact, in American law, and elected official who attends a Bilderberg meeting is violating the Logan Act, which forbids elected officials meeting in private with private individuals, as it breeds corruption.

Yes, I guess now we can be sure "they" do exist. And considering the facts you have quoted here well...perhaps I may sound like a "dumb" to you but "things happen for a reason" and the decisions this people can take are the reason "why" a lot of things do happen. I remember the SAP imposed by the IMF to our countries here in South America back in the eighties, my country did a "good job" and put order in our economy but almost all of the assets that used to belong to the "Nation" are in the hands of private companies, and many of them are from abroad; in addition to that even if it was something "good" for the people (jobs, raise in production rates and stuff that allegedly allowed our Government increase the "social spending") it created a BIG social gap, our country is located just right behind Brazil in social inequities because of a poor distribution of wealth (and I have understood that is kind of worldwide ranking made by the UN) even if our "macro economics" figures are ok and we're "growing". This SAPs have crippled some very rich countries like Argentina, Brazil or Peru, for instance, even if they are full of natural resources and specially the 2 first ones have got a pretty developed industry, but what about the people that live there? are they getting any profit from all that? my answer, knowing their reality on first hand, would be definetly "no". That is just a fact, I am not pretending to go "beyond" that or trying to make an "in depth" analysis (you're the expert MeOhMy and surely some others guys here too).

All of this makes me to remember a discussion we had once in Universal History Class when I attended to High School in early nineties and the conclusion was that the next step in our development as a "society" is the Government of the Global Companies as the International Rule of Law (or New World Order if you want to call it like that), to set limits to the sovereignty of States, etc (things that at first sight look good, like the stablishment of War Crimes or Crimes Against Humanity that can be investigated by any given Country because of the Universal Jurisdiction and then take the rest of the investigation to the "International Criminal Court" in The Hague stablished by the Treaty of Rome in 2002 ). I really don't know if that could mean or be something "evil" or "bad" for the people of this planet, perhaps it is all for a good reason or to stablish some "order" in a "messy planet", but certainly the Democratic Institutions and the Governments are being used like "tools" in order to get this "elite groups" goals or just slowly being degradating into nothing more than a simple "instrument" for the same purpose, and that idea it is not that "good" for the people because in a way we all are being taking for "fools" (no offense pls!) to satisfy who knows what kind of "interests".